Guidance on Abusive Conduct and Bullying in the Workplace 7/26/2016

Guideline on Guidance on Abusive Conduct and Bullying in the Workplace

Related Policy: Discrimination and Harassment

Effective Date: 7/26/2016

Contact: Dianna Henderson

Email: Dianna.Henderson@ucop.edu Phone #: (510) 987-9484

Please see attached President’s letter and the Guidance on Staff Abusive Conduct and Bullying in the Workplace.

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA

BERKELEY • DAVIS • IRVINE • LOS ANGELES • MERCED • RIVERSIDE • SAN DIEGO • SAN FRANCISCO SANTA BARBARA • SANTA CRUZ,

___________________________

1111 Franklin StreetOakland, California 94607-5200Phone: (510) 987-9074Fax:(510) 987-9086http: / /www.ucop.edu

July 26, 2016

CHANCELLORSLAWRENCE BERKELEY NATIONAL LABORATORY DIRECTORMEDICAL CENTER CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICERSVICE PRESIDENT—AGRICULTURE AND NATURAL RESOURCES

Dear Colleagues:

While I consider the University of California to be a leader for its treatment of employeesand for cultivating a positive working environment, I recognize the unfortunate reality thatbullying and other abusive behaviors occur in every workplace. In my regular meetingsand interactions with staff, Council of University of California Staff Assemblies (CUCSA)leadership and members of the CUCSA delegation, and the Staff Advisors to The Regents,finding ways to improve the working climate for staff has been a consistent theme. To helpadvance this important issue, I formed a working group to aid me in my development ofPresidential Guidance with regard to abusive behavior and bullying of staff earlier thisyear. They have been hard at work over the past few months and recently submitted areport and recommendations to me on this matter. I am including their report as anattachment to this message.

I would like to make clear to you and to those at all of our locations that all UC communitymembers are expected to behave in ways that support the University’s Principles ofCommunity and Regents Policy 1111 (Statement of Ethical Values and Standards of EthicalConduct), which state that UC is committed to treating each member of the Universitycommunity with respect and dignity. The University does not tolerate abusive conduct orbullying. Such behaviors are inconsistent with the values of the University and should beaddressed directly and comprehensively, whereby staff at all levels found to be engaging inabusive conduct should be held accountable, and no member of the University communitywill be retaliated against for reporting bullying in good faith.

UC has a number of current policies that could be used to address bullying, but there issome confusion among employees about what bullying is and how to address it. Consistentwith the recommendations, I would like to start by moving us towards a systemwidedefinition of bullying and abusive conduct. Fortunately, the State legislature helped leadthe way on the formulation of such language and I believe it suits the purposes of theUniversity, as well. Assembly Bill 2053, which requires training on the prevention ofabusive conduct, defines abusive conduct as “conduct of an employer or employee in the

Chancellors et al.July 26, 2016Page 2

workplace, with malice, that a reasonable person would find hostile, offensive, andunrelated to an employer’s legitimate business interests.”

Abusive conduct may include repeated infliction of verbal abuse, such as the use ofderogatory remarks, insults, and epithets, verbal or physical conduct that a reasonableperson would find threatening, intimidating, or humiliating, or the gratuitous sabotage orundermining of a person’s work performance. A single act shall not constitute abusiveconduct, unless especially severe and egregious.

In addition to clarifying policies regarding bullying, I feel it is vitally important that weprovide clear guidance about best practices with regard to bullying prevention, theidentification of abusive conduct in the workplace, and the resources available to staff whensuch incidents arise. You will note that in the working group’s report, these resources havebeen mapped, and it is crucial that these resources are accessible and visible to staff.

I ask that you ensure the attached Presidential Guidance is distributed broadly and that inyour communication to the campuses, you not only highlight the efforts being undertakensystemwide, but also the specific campus-based resources available to your staff on thismatter.

Please be in touch with Executive Vice President Rachael Nava or Vice President DwaineDuckett if you have any questions or comments about this Presidential Guidance. Thankyou for your commitment to address the important issue of abusive conduct and bullying ofstaff, and to cultivate a climate of collegiality and care that befits the University ofCalifornia.

Yours very truly,

J et NapolitanoPresident

Enclosures

cc: Executive Vice President NavaVice President Duckett

Guidance from the President Regarding Staff Abusive Conduct and Bullying7/26/16

The University of California is committed to providing a safe, supportive, responsive and equitable environment for allemployees. The University strives to be a leader as an employer and to foster a positive working environment.

In furtherance of these goals and the University’s anti-harassment and anti-discrimination policies, all UC communitymembers are expected to behave in ways that support UC’s Principles of Community and Regents Policy 1111 (Statementof Ethical Values and Standards of Ethical Conduct), which states that UC is committed to treating each member of theUniversity community with respect and dignity. Abusive conduct and bullying behaviors are inconsistent with the valuesof the University and should be addressed directly and comprehensively. The University does not tolerate abusiveconduct or bullying. Regardless of circumstances or setting, staff at all levels found to be engaging in abusive conductshould be held accountable. No member of the University community will be retaliated against for reporting bullying ingood faith. While UC has a number of current policies that could be used to address bullying, there is some confusionamong employees about what bullying is and how to address it.

State legislation related to abusive conduct provides a helpful description of bullying. Assembly Bill 2053, which requirestraining on the prevention of abusive conduct, defines abusive conduct as:

Conduct of an employer or employee in the workplace, with malice, that a reasonable person would find hostile,offensive, and unrelated to an employer’s legitimate business interests.

Abusive conduct may include repeated infliction of verbal abuse, such as the use of derogatory remarks, insults,and epithets, verbal or physical conduct that a reasonable person would find threatening, intimidating, orhumiliating, or the gratuitous sabotage or undermining of a person’s work performance. A single act shall notconstitute abusive conduct, unless especially severe and egregious.

Examples of abusive conduct may include:• persistent or egregious use of abusive, insulting, or offensive language directed at an employee• spreading misinformation or malicious rumors• behavior or language that frightens, humiliates, belittles, or degrades, including criticism or feedback that is

delivered with yelling, screaming, threats, or insults• making repeated inappropriate comments about a person’s appearance, lifestyle, family, or culture• regularly inappropriately teasing or making someone the brunt of pranks or practical jokes• inappropriately interfering with a person’s personal property or work equipment• circulating inappropriate or embarrassing photos or videos via e-mail or social media;• unwarranted physical contact• purposefully inappropriately excluding, isolating, or marginalizing a person from normal work activities

There is a difference between bullying and appropriate supervision. Examples of reasonable supervisory actions, whencarried out in an appropriate manner, include:

• providing performance appraisals• coaching or providing constructive feedback• monitoring or restricting access to sensitive information for legitimate business reasons• scheduling ongoing meetings to address performance issues• setting aggressive performance goals to help meet departmental goals• counseling or disciplining an employee for misconduct• investigating alleged misconduct

Differences of opinion, interpersonal conflicts, and occasional problems in working relations are an inevitable part ofworking life and do not necessarily constitute workplace bullying. Moreover, this guidance is not intended to interfere

with employees’ right to engage in protected, concerted activity under the Higher Education Employer-EmployeeRelations Act (HEERA).

People, if they experience abusive conduct or bullying, have a variety of resources they can go to, including but notlimited to, local Human Resources and Ombuds or similar offices.

For more information on the above policy guidance you may contact your local human resources or Dianna Henderson,Director of HR Policy and Chief of Staff to the VP of HR at Dianna.henderson@ucop.edu.

UNIVERSITYOFCALIFORNIA

Report to the President

Abusive ConductWorking Group

June 6, 2016

CONTENTS

I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1Statement 1Background 1Working Group Process 1Summary and Recommendations 2

II. EXISTING POLICIES AND PROCEDURES 3UC Policies 3Definitions and Scope 3Procedures 4

III. PREVENTION AND MANAGEMENT 4Prevention 4Dispute Resolution and Complaint Management 5

IV. COMMUNICATION 6

V. BEST PRACTICES 6Policies, Guidance and Statements 6Ombuds 7Communication, Culture and Training 7Dispute Resolution and Complaint Management 7

VI. RECOMMENDED OPTIONS 8Statements and Definitions 8Recommendations to Locations 9Description of Systemwide Efforts 9

VII. APPENDICES 10Appendix A. UC Berkeley Proposed Bullying Policy 10Appendix B. A.B. 2053 17Appendix C. Existing UC Policies 19Appendix D. Working Group Members 20

I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Statement

The University of California (UC) is committed to providing a safe, supportive, responsive and equitableenvironment for all employees. The University strives to be a leader as an employer and to foster apositive working environment. All faculty and staff members are expected to behave in ways thatsupport UC’s Principles of Community and Regents Policy 1111 (Statement of Ethical Values andStandards of Ethical Conduct), which states that UC is committed to treating each member of theUniversity community with respect and dignity. Abusive conduct and bullying behaviors areinconsistent with the values of the University and should be addressed directly and comprehensively.

Background

On September 9, 2014, Governor Brown signed Assembly Bill (A.B.) 2053 into law, amending the FairEmployment and Housing Act to require that covered employers include training on the prevention ofabusive conduct in their state-mandated sexual harassment prevention curriculum. A.B. 2053 is atraining requirement only; it does not prohibit abusive conduct. The University is in compliance withthis requirement, which took effect January 1, 2015.

Consistent with the intent of A.B. 2053 to reduce workplace bullying, there is interest across UC ii,

issuing a statement or guidance specifically addressing this issue. Although UC currently has a numberof policies that can be used to address abusive conduct when it occurs, there is no systemwidestatement or policy prohibiting it, nor is there a consistent definition of what constitutes abusiveconduct and how to most effectively address allegations of abusive conduct.

Working Group Process

The UC Abusive Conduct Working Group was established in response to a request from PresidentNapolitano to Executive Vice President Nava in February 2016. The President charged the group withproviding information and analysis that would aid in her development of Presidential Guidance onabusive conduct and bullying of staff. She requested that the group include appropriate Universityrepresentation and engage in a consultative process that spans the ten campuses. Specifically, thePresident requested information and analysis related to definition of terms, scope, dispute resolution(formal and alternative), functional areas on campus best suited to manage these complaints and aclose and thorough review of existing policies, including how they are currently communicated oncampuses.

The working group met on six occasions between March and May 2016. The group divided intosubgroups to examine current UC abusive conduct policies and processes and to identify best practices

1

and inconsistencies or gaps in these areas. In their analyses, the subgroups used information collectedfrom all locations through surveys of online resources and interviews with Human Resources staff.These analyses are presented in Sections ll-IV of this report. Sections V and VI describe best practicesand recommendations that arose from subgroup discussions.

Summary and Recommendations

UC locations currently have many policies and other directives that address some forms of abusiveconduct, particularly related to workplace violence. The only location with a proposed bullying-specificpolicy is UC Berkeley; the policy is expected to take effect in the next few weeks. Most locations statedthat a clear, systemwide definition of bullying with examples of prohibited conduct would help bothemployees experiencing bullying and staff responsible for investigating bullying complaints. A fewlocations stated that existing policies and procedures are adequate for addressing complaints.

Practices to prevent and manage bullying situations vary across locations. Some locations focus oncreating positive, collaborative work environments; others offer trainings for employees and managerson dispute resolution and other related topics. Due to differences in how bullying is interpreted andthe complexity of some bullying situations, there are many approaches to resolution. Options forinformal resolution include working with an Ombuds, HR, or employee assistance office. Depending onthe circumstances, formal resolution procedures may include filing a grievance, PPSM-70 complaint,Title IX complaint, discrimination complaint, or harassment complaint. Although multiple avenues toresolution may be appropriate, the resources available to staff and the process for accessing them isoften confusing.

As described more fully in Section V, the working group recommends issuing guidance that outlinesUC’s expectations for respectful behavior and productive work environments. The guidance couldinclude such elements as:

• A statement that the University does not tolerate bullying and that staff found to be engagingin such behavior are expected to be held accountable through existing mechanisms;

• A reference to the definition of abusive conduct in A.B. 2053 and clear examples of abusiveconduct;

• Recommendations that locations staff Ombuds offices appropriately, designate bullying“intake offices,” create bullying-specific websites, and develop bullying prevention andtraining communication plans; and

• Descriptions of systemwide efforts to prevent bullying, including training and a systemwidewebsite.

2

II. EXISTING POLICIES AND PROCEDURES

UC Policies

All campuses have Principles of Community to guide appropriate behavior. Many locations also havepolicies focused on violence in the workplace or disruptive behavior, but they are not focused onbullying per Se; UC Berkeley is the only UC location that has proposed a specific policy fully dedicatedto bullying, entitled “Workplace Bullying Prevention.” UC Irvine does not have a specific policy butaddresses abusive conduct through its Labor and Employee Relations, Ombuds, Discrimination andWhistleblower offices. Other locations address some bullying behaviors through policies such as,“Disruptive Behavior in the Workplace,” “Violence and Hate Incidents in the Workplace,” “WorkplaceViolence Prevention,” “Intimidating and Disruptive Behavior,” and “Sustaining Community andPreventing Violence.” Although several locations have policies or other resources that can bereferenced when managing bullying, some only have policies that prohibit workplace violence. Inmost instances, bullying takes the form of offensive and disrespectful behavior rather than physicalviolence.

The working group focused on staff issues, but it is important to note that there are related policiesthat apply to faculty and students as well. The Faculty Code of Conduct (APM-015) (as approved bythe Assembly of the Academic Senate and by the Regents) establishes the ethical and professionalstandards which University faculty are expected to observe. Students are expected to comply with theStudent Code of Conduct. Faculty, staff and students in the UC community work together every dayand abusive behavior can occur across these lines.

Definitions and Scope

Among the UC locations, UC Berkeley’s proposed policy includes the clearest and mostcomprehensive definition of bullying. The policy provides concrete examples of bullying and definesthe difference between bullying and supervision in order to reduce confusion and baselessaccusations of misconduct. Other locations’ policies address the broader spectrum of disruption orviolence in the workplace and therefore include multiple definitions, such as bullying, domesticviolence, intimidation, property damage, stalking, threats and violent behavior. UCLA MedicalCenter’s Intimidating and Disruptive Behavior policy also includes guidelines that classify the severityof misconduct at Level 1 (physical abuse), Level 2 (verbal abuse), and Level 3 (indirect or at-largeverbal abuse).

Some policies include a detailed list to clarify who is covered, such as staff, undergraduate-studentworkers, patients, visitors, volunteers, contractors, and physicians.

3

Procedures

All policies state that incidents that are considered an emergency should be immediately reported tocampus security or 911. Most locations have multiple reporting options, depending upon the typeand severity of the occurrence or on one’s role in the organization. UC Berkeley’s proposed policy andDavis’ policy reference a hotline for anonymous reports. UC Davis also lists contact information forStudent Judicial Affairs and Academic Personnel. UCLA established a Behavioral Intervention TeamCoordinator who addresses prevention, emergence and resolution of issues. UC Irvine’s MedicalCenter and UCLA Medical Center have committees that assist with the administrative response toincidents.

In several existing policies, resolution of issues includes corrective action procedures, such aswarning, written apology, suspension or termination. The proposed UC Berkeley bullying policyprovides a list of options for early resolution, including obtaining agreement between the parties,separating the parties, changing reporting lines, referring to counseling, taking personnel action,conducting training and following up to ensure resolution. In the event of potential danger orparticularly disruptive conduct, the policies note that investigatory leave may be initiated so thatrelevant information can be gathered and an appropriate resolution or disciplinary action can betaken.

Workplace violence policies that integrate bullying as a definition are helpful, but the definitions arenot robust and may differ from the definition used in A.B. 2053. In addition, the lack of examples ofwhat is bullying and what is not can be confusing to staff and those who are trying to address thebehavior. Procedures for intervention, early resolution, investigation and associated discipline orsanctions may also be lacking in existing workplace violence policies.

III. PREVENTION AND MANAGEMENT

Prevention

Positive, collaborative working environments were cited as a deterrent to abusive conduct. Inaddition to Principles of Community, several locations have values initiatives that describe the type ofclimate they expect employees to foster.

Locations also stated that training conducted by Human Resources, outside vendors, or the OmbudsOffice helps prevent issues that may lead to bullying. Training for managers focused on goodperformance management practices and conflict resolution and training for staff focused on policyand process awareness were viewed as very helpful.

4

The systemwide training module on Sexual Violence and Sexual Harassment (SVSH) Prevention,available to staff on the systemwide Learning and Management System (LMS), includes a full moduleon bullying (“Avoiding Abusive Behavior”). The module defines abusive conduct, provides examples ofit and discusses how it negatively impacts individuals and the organization. The training forsupervisors provides additional details on supervisors’ duties to respond to, report and preventabusive conduct. There is no separate training specifically related to bullying available on LMS.

Dispute Resolution and Complaint Management

Locations’ responses to bullying complaints can take many forms. This is often appropriate, ascomplaints may range in severity from situations where employees are unhappy with performancemanagement to situations where employees are experiencing severe bullying combined withdiscrimination or harassment. For this reason, most locations have several entities that respond toabusive conduct complaints, including an employee’s supervisor, Human Resources offices (generallyEmployee and Labor Relations divisions), Ombuds Offices, Title IX and Nondiscrimination offices,Whistleblower complaint hotlines, Behavioral Intervention Teams, University counsel and occasionallycampus police forces.

The primary informal counseling options to address bullying complaints are employee supervisors;Ombuds and equivalent offices, which provide confidential and impartial conflict resolution;Employee and Labor Relations staff; and employee assistance programs, which offer confidentialcounseling, consultation and referral services for employees and managers.

Formal processes for complaint resolution include grievance procedures for represented employeesand PPSM-70 complaints for staff, though some bullying complaints will not meet the eligibilityrequirements for complaint resolution through these mechanisms. Whistleblower complaints arereferred to the appropriate office, generally Employee and Labor Relations, for investigation orintervention. Title IX and Nondiscrimination offices may also be involved in investigating formalcomplaints where appropriate.

Although there are currently many methods for addressing bullying behavior at UC locations, theresources available to staff are not always apparent; it seems that many employees are eitherunaware of these resources or unsure how to access them. Employees also may be reluctant to reportabusive conduct for fear of retaliation.

In addition, information on whether counseling or discipline has worked to reduce incidents ofabusive conduct is not readily available because such issues are normally considered to beconfidential personnel matters.

5

IV. COMMUNICATION

The predominate methods that most locations use to communicate Abusive Conduct-related policiesand procedures are email, websites/intranet, and new employee orientation (NEC). For example, UCBerkeley distributes CalMessage emails to applicable staff. The emails may be directed to designatedstaff, such as managers and supervisors, or distributed to all staff. That communication frequentlyincludes links to websites or intranet sites that provide more detail regarding the policy and specificprocedures to address issues. Campuses that conduct NEC use that time to review key policies,including those that are related to abusive conduct. Since NEC is sometimes conducted by the hiringdepartment instead of Human Resources (HR) or another central office, it is difficult to gauge howwell these policies are being communicated to new employees.

Ensuring that Abusive Conduct-related policies and procedures are communicated is the charge of theHuman Resources departments on many UC campuses. In addition to the methods listed above, HRcommunicates policies through meeting with Business Partners (UC Riverside), HR Advisory Groups orCommittees (UC Davis, UC Davis Medical Center, UCLA) that help to disseminate information to keyconstituents across campus. A small number of campuses distribute regular newsletters and use themto communicate new or revised policies (UC Davis, UC Davis Medical Center, UC Riverside).

Abusive conduct awareness and prevention have been included in supervisory trainings and webinars;Agriculture and Natural Resources often uses webinars since their employee population is widely-dispersed across the region. UC Berkeley and the Cffice of the President indicated that policies andprocedures are communicated during the recruitment process via the offer letter. The most uniquemethods that were mentioned included UC San Francisco’s compliance-oriented approach of havingemployees sign a notice that they are aware of the policy and UC Irvine Medical Center’s engagingapproach of integrating the policy into a values campaign that includes awards and training.

V. BEST PRACTICES

Policies, Guidance and Statements

Many locations cited having clear policies that include examples as a best practice. Most requested asystemwide or local policy, guidance, or statement with definitions. Several locations stated thatbullying is becoming a “headline issue” for their organizations and noted that there should bealignment between a systemwide policy or statement and local policies. Some also suggested thatbullying be included in newly created or existing Codes of Conduct.

6

There was hesitation about a systemwide policy among some locations — several medical centers andone campus location believe a policy or statement is unnecessary. One location noted that existingpolicies enable it to respond effectively, especially since situations vary and different resources mayneed to be used for each investigation. There is a concern that even with a policy, it can be difficult tohold faculty and high-ranking staff accountable; there may need to be another way to address thesetwo groups.

Ombuds

Several locations stated that it is important to have an Ombuds or similar office to conduct trainingrelated to bullying and to assistwith resolution of issues. UC Irvine’s Ombuds Office was referencedas a good model of the services that Ombuds and similar offices can provide. Neutral, confidentialthird party assistance and advice was cited as an important option for employees dealing with abusiveconduct situations.

Communication, Culture and Training

Three locations described communicating their values and associated behaviors as a best practice foraddressing abusive conduct. UC Irvine Medical Center has the ARISE Values initiative, UCLA has the CI-CARE initiative that promotes upgraded service and the UC Office of the President (UCOP) has itsPrinciples of Community. A cultural commitment to a safe environment free from abusive conductshould be displayed through clear communication of expectations, policies and behaviors.

Several UC campuses have developed effective workshops and tools that describe bullying behaviorsand how to manage them, including UC Irvine’s Ombuds Office and UCLA’s Behavior InterventionTeam. UC Irvine has conducted trainings on conflict resolution and mediation as well.

Dispute Resolution and Complaint Management

Most locations were comfortable with the abilities of their Employee and Labor Relations offices toinvestigate complaints and utilize corrective action policies, although several stated that cleardefinitions to reference would make this process easier. One campus indicated that the structure oftheir HR office, which is more centralized than most, allows them to see across the whole campus andpositions them to conduct early interventions and resolutions.

Locations have found it important to establish processes to monitor incidents of bullying in order todetermine whether remedial actions have been effective. In addition, thorough and timelyinvestigations benefit all parties involved in bullying complaints.

Several locations have experienced staff teams that work together effectively to address abusiveconduct; UC Berkeley’s Human Resources office works in tandem with the Ombuds Office and the

7

Office for the Prevention of Harassment and Discrimination, UCLA’s Behavioral Intervention TeamCoordinator pulls together multiple offices to address concerns and Lawrence Berkeley National Labuses a Crisis Action Team in situations involving violent verbal or physical behavior.

VI. RECOMMENDED OPTIONS

To address locations’ desire for clarity on what constitutes bullying behavior and how it should beaddressed, the working group recommends issuing guidance that outlines UC’s expectations forrespectful behavior and productive work environments. The proposed guidance is not intended tointerfere with employees’ right to engage in protected, concerted activity. Counsel can assist withpreparing and implementing the guidance to be consistent with employee rights under the HigherEducation Employer-Employee Relations Act (HEERA). The working group recommends that thecompleted guidance be sent to the Academic Senate for consideration.

The guidance could include such elements as:

Statements and Definitions

• A statement that the University does not tolerate bullying• A reference to the definition of abusive conduct in A.B. 2053

o This definition (See Appendix B) states that abusive conduct is behavior by an employeror employee in the workplace, “with malice, that a reasonable person would findhostile, offensive, and unrelated to an employer’s legitimate business interests.”

o The definition also provides specific examples of abusive conduct and notes that a singleact is not abusive conduct unless it is especially severe and egregious. UC Berkeley’sproposed definition of abusive conduct (See Appendix A) is based upon the A.B. 2053definition.

• A statement that staff at all levels found to be engaging in abusive conduct are expected tobe held accountable through existing mechanisms

• Clear examples of abusive conduct, including a prohibition against retaliation for reportingbullying

• An explanation of the difference between bullying and appropriate supervision similar to thedescription in UC Berkeley’s proposed policy

• An acknowledgement of the importance of Ombuds Offices or equivalent resources forconfidential problem-solving and mediation

• A statement noting that there are existing UC policies that address some bullying behaviors,such as workplace violence

8

Recommendations to Locations

• Recommendation that locations staff Ombuds and equivalent offices appropriately andensure that their services are easily accessible

• Recommendation that locations designate bullying “intake offices” to provide clearinformation on how to mediate disputes and report complaints related to abusive conducto These offices should be knowledgeable about how the location is organized and should

be able to refer employees to appropriate resources, such as the Ombuds Office if theemployee prefers confidential assistance.

o Existing resources such as bullying or whistleblower hotlines should direct employees tothese offices.

o Some locations may dedicate new resources to the creation of these offices, but in mostcases it will not be necessary — current approaches to addressing bullying can bestreamlined and centralized.

• Recommendation that locations create bullying-specific websites that:o Are clear and easy to understando Link to a systemwide websiteo Include consistent information such as:

• Contact information for the location’s bullying intake office• Resources available at the location, such as trainings on conflict mediation or

dispute resolution services• Information about how to report bullying and possible resolution options

• Recommendation that locations develop bullying prevention and training communicationplans

Description of Systemwide Efforts• Description of training

o Guidance could point to bullying training module in the required SVSH trainingo UCOP could develop separate bullying-specific trainings for employees and managers

that would be offered through the systemwide LMS or presented live• Description of systemwide bullying website that links to bullying-specific websites at each

location

9

VII. APPENDICES Appendix A: UC Berkeley Proposed Bullying Policy

University of California, BerkeleyPolicy Issued: TBDEffective Date: TBDSupersedes: None, New PolicyNext Review Date: TBD

Workplace Bullying Prevention

Responsible Executive: Vice Chancellor — Administration & Finance

Responsible Office: Central Human Resources

Contact: Jeannine Raymond, Assistant Vice Chancellor, Human Resources510-642-9022askeru@berkeley.edu (non-represented staff)labrel@berkeley.edu (represented staff)

I. POLICY SUMMARY

The University of California, Berkeley is committed to promoting and maintaining a healthyworking, learning, and social environment where every individual is treated with civility and respect.Bullying behavior will not be tolerated in the University of California, Berkeley workplace. TheUniversity strongly encourages anyone who is a victim of bullying behavior, or anyone who observessuch behavior, to promptly report it to any manager or supervisor or Central Human Resources.Retaliation against individuals who report bullying also is prohibited.

The University will respond promptly and effectively to reports of bullying and will takeappropriate action to prevent, correct, and discipline behavior that violates this policy.

II. POLICY SCOPE

This policy applies to non-represented staff, including undergraduate student-employees, andrepresented staff in the Clerical Unit, Health Care Professional Unit, Registered Nurses Unit, PatientCare Technical Unit, Printing Trades Unit, Research Support Professional Unit, Service Unit, SkilledCrafts Unit, Student Health Physicians’ Unit, and Technical Unit are responsible for complying withthis policy in the workplace, at University-sponsored events, and in connection with work-relatedtravel.

10

III. POLICY STATEMENT

A. Prohibited Conduct

Bullying is a pattern of repeated behavior that a reasonable person would find hostile, offensive,and unrelated to the University’s legitimate business interests. Bullying behavior may take manyforms including physical, verbal, or written acts or behaviors. Workplace bullying often involves anabuse or misuse of power. A single physical, verbal, or written act or behavior generally will notconstitute bullying unless especially severe and egregious. -

Examples of bullying may include:

• persistent or egregious use of abusive, insulting, or offensive language directed at anemployee;

• spreading misinformation or malicious rumors;• behavior or language that frightens, humiliates, belittles, or degrades, including

criticism or feedback that is delivered with yelling, screaming, threats, or insults;• making repeated inappropriate comments about a person’s appearance, lifestyle,

family, or culture;• regularly teasing or making someone the brunt of pranks or practical jokes;• interfering with a person’s personal property or work equipment;• circulating inappropriate or embarrassing photos or videos via e-mail or social media;• unwananted physical contact; or• purposefully excluding, isolating, or marginalizing a person from normal work

activities.

B. Bullying vs. Supervision

It is important to distinguish between bullying behavior and appropriate workplace supervision.Reasonable supervisory actions, when carried out in an appropriate manner, include:

• providing performance appraisals;• coaching or providing constructive feedback;• monitoring or restricting access to sensitive information for legitimate business

reasons;• scheduling ongoing meetings to address performance issues;• setting aggressive performance goals to help meet departmental goals;• counseling or disciplining an employee for misconduct; and• investigating alleged misconduct.

Differences of opinion, interpersonal conflicts, and occasional problems in working relations are aninevitable part of working life and do not necessarily constitute workplace bullying.

11

C. Retaliation

This policy prohibits retaliation (e.g., threats, intimidation, reprisals, and adverse actions related toemployment) against any person who reports bullying, assists someone with a report of bullying, orparticipates in an investigation or resolution of a bullying complaint. Reports of such retaliation willbe addressed under the procedures described below.

D. Dissemination of this Policy

As part of the University’s commitment to providing a working and learning environment free frombullying, this policy will be disseminated widely to the University community upon onboarding andthrough publications, websites, new employee orientations, and other appropriate channels ofcommunication.

IV. PROCEDURES FOR REPORTING AM) RESPONDING TOREPORTS OF BULLYING

A. Reporting Incidents of Bullying

All members of the University community are strongly encouraged to report conduct believed toconstitute bullying under this policy to a manager, supervisor, or Central Human Resources.Managers and supervisors who observe bullying behavior or receive a report of bullying are requiredto address such behavior immediately and notify their FIR Partner/Representative.

The University has distinct procedures for the investigation and resolution of complaints againststaff, students, and faculty. Central Human Resources will refer reports of alleged bullying byfaculty, academic appointees, and sworn members of the University of California PoliceDepartment to the appropriate office or grievance procedure for processing. Whether a complaintmade against an undergraduate student-employee is processed under this policy depends on whetherthe conduct at issue arises out of their employment status or student status.

B. Resolution Options

Individuals making reports of bullying will be informed about options for resolving potentialviolations of this policy. These options may include facilitated early resolution or formalinvestigation.

The University will respond to reports of bullying brought anonymously or by third parties notdirectly involved in the complaint. However, the response to such reports may be limited if thereport’s allegations cannot be verified by independent facts. Anonymous reports may be madeonline or by calling the Ethics Point hotline at (800) 403-4744.

12

C. Facilitated Early Resolution

The goal of early resolution is to resolve concerns at the earliest stage possible with the cooperationof all of the parties involved. The University encourages early resolution and will assist the partiesin reaching a mutually agreeable resolution when the parties wish to resolve the situationcollaboratively.

Early resolution may include a review of the facts, but typically does not include a formalinvestigation. Means for early resolution will be flexible and encompass a full range of possibleappropriate outcomes.

Options for early resolution may include:• obtaining an agreement between the parties;• physically separating the parties;• changing reporting lines;• referring the parties to counseling and coaching programs;• negotiating an agreement for personnel action;• conducting targeted educational and training programs; and/or• following up with the parties after a period of time to assure that the resolution has

been implemented effectively.

While the University encourages early resolution, the University does not require that partiesparticipate in early resolution prior to the University’s decision to initiate a formal investigation. Insome cases, Central Human Resources may determine that early resolution is inappropriate and mayinitiate a formal investigation instead.

D. Formal Investigation

In response to reports of bullying where early resolution is unsuccessful or inappropriate, thecomplainant may request a formal investigation. Central Human Resources may initiate a formalinvestigation after a preliminary review of the facts even in cases where the complainant has notrequested one.

Formal investigation of reports of bullying will incorporate the following procedures:1. The respondent will be advised of the relevant allegations in the complaint.2. The investigation generally will include interviews with the parties if available,

interviews with other witnesses as needed, and a review of relevant documents orother evidence as appropriate.

3. Disclosure of facts to parties and witnesses will be limited to what is reasonably necessaryto conduct a fair and thorough investigation. Participants in an investigation may beadvised to maintaining confidentiality when essential to protect the integrity of theinvestigation.

4. Upon request, the complainant and the respondent may each have a representativepresent when he or she is interviewed. Other witnesses may have a representative

13

present at the discretion of the investigator or as required by the applicable Universitypolicy or collective bargaining agreement.

5. At any time during the investigation, the investigator may recommend that the Universityprovide interim protections or remedies for the complainant or witnesses. Theseprotections or remedies may include separating the parties, placing limitations on contactbetween the parties, or making alternative work arrangements. Failure to comply with theterms of interim protections may be considered a separate violation of this policy.

6. Central Human Resources will make every effort to complete the investigation as quicklyas possible. Generally, the investigation will be completed within 90 calendar days fromthe date the request for formal investigation was submitted.

7. Following the completion of the investigation, the investigator will prepare a written reportthat, at a minimum, includes a statement of the allegations and issues, the positions of theparties, a summary of the evidence, findings of fact, and a determination by theinvestigator as to whether the conduct at issue violated this policy. Central HumanResources will submit the report to the appropriate University official, and, in consultationwith the appropriate manager or supervisor, determine and implement the actionsnecessary to resolve the complaint.

8. The complainant and the respondent will be informed when the investigation is completedand whether the complaint was substantiated. Actions taken to resolve the complaint, ifany, that are directly related to the complainant, such as an order that the respondent notcontact the complainant will be shared with the complainant. In accordance withUniversity policies protecting individuals’ privacy, the complainant may be notifiedgenerally that the matter has been referred for disciplinary action, but will not be informedof the details of the recommended disciplinary action without the respondent’s consent.

9. The complainant and the respondent may request a copy of the investigative reportpursuant to University policies governing privacy and access to personal information. Inaccordance with University policy, the report will be redacted to protect the privacy ofpersonal and confidential information regarding all individuals other than the individualrequesting the report.

E. Remedies

Findings of violations of this policy may be considered in determining remedies for individualsharmed by the bullying and will be referred to the appropriate manager. Violations may includeengaging in bullying, retaliating against a complainant reporting bullying, or violating interimprotections. Investigative reports made pursuant to this policy may be used as evidence insubsequent complaint or grievance resolution processes or disciplinary proceedings.

14

V. OTHER CAMPUS RESOURCES

Ombuds Offices: These offices provide informal, impartial conflict resolution and problem- solvingservices regarding academic or work-related concerns. The Ombuds Offices are strictly confidentialresources. Unless there is an imminent risk of serious harm, they will not disclose the identity ofindividuals who have used their services or information provided without express permission. Inaddition, these offices are not offices of record and are not offices for filing complaints.Communications with the Ombuds offices do not place the University on notice and individualsseeking to file complaints will be informed of appropriate University resources. In the interest ofmaintaining confidentiality, the Ombuds offices request that anyone seeking assistance contact theoffice by telephone only.Staff Ombuds Office: 510-642-7823Student Ombuds Office: 510-642-5754

Office for the Prevention of Harassment and Discrimination (OPIID): OPFID is responsible forensuring the University provides an environment for faculty, staff and students that is free fromdiscrimination and harassment on the basis of categories including race, color national origin,gender, age and sexual orientation/identity. OPHD also has the specific responsibility for providingprompt and effective responses to all complaints of sex discrimination or harassment for faculty,staff and students. In addition to serving as an investigation officer when a formal complaint ofsexual harassment is filed, OPHD provides consultation to faculty administrators, directors,managers and supervisors, and graduate and undergraduates students for resolution strategies at theearliest possible levels.OPHD: 685 University Hall; 510-643-7985; ask_ophd@berkeley.edu

University Health Services (UHS): The two departments below provide assessment, consultation,and counseling in a confidential setting, and referrals regarding work and personal stress oremotional concerns that are interfering with an individual’s ability to work in his or her professionalor academic setting.UHS: Tang Center, 2222 Bancroft Way

• Employee Assistancefor Faculty and Staff: 510-643-7754• Social Services for Graduate and Undergraduate Students: 510-642-6074

Staff Diversity Initiatives, Division of Equity & Inclusion: Staff Diversity Initiatives (SDI) is aunit of the Division of Equity & Inclusion that is charged with engaging staff and management toensure staff diversity throughout the campus at all levels of employment and to foster an inclusiveworkplace environment with a welcoming climate.SD1 104 California Hall, #1508; (510) 642-5973; staffdiversity@berkeley.edu

Whistleblower Investigations, Office of Ethics, Risk and Compliance Services (OERCS): TheUniversity of California has a responsibility to conduct its affairs ethically and in compliance withthe law. Whistleblower investigations are conducted in response to reports of known or suspectedimproper governmental activity or retaliation against an employee for reporting suspectedwrongdoing.

Whistleblower Investigations: Anonymous reports may be made online or by calling the EthicsPoint hotline at (800) 403-4744.

15

VI. POLICY WEB ADDRESS

http://campuspol.berkeley.edulpolicies/bullying.pdf

VII. GLOSSARY

Complainant: An individual who alleges they have been subjected to bullying.

Exclusively Represented Staff Member: A staff employee represented by a union.

Exclusively Represented Academic Appointee: An employee holding an academic title that is alsorepresented by a union.

Legitimate Business Interests: An action that supports or is related to the University of California’smissions of education, research, and public service.

Reasonable Person Test: The basis for determining whether the conduct at issue rises to the level ofbullying is whether a reasonable person in the same or similar circumstances would find the conducthostile, offensive, and unrelated to the University’s legitimate business interests.Though the intention of the person responsible for the conduct may be considered, it is notdeterminative.

Respondent: An individual alleged to have violated this policy.

Workplace: For purposes of this policy, any location owned, leased, or rented by the Regents of theUniversity of California on behalf of the University of California, Berkeley, or any location where aUniversity employee is acting in the course and scope of employment. This includes, but is notlimited to, buildings, grounds, and surrounding perimeters, including parking lots, field locations,classrooms, and residence halls. It also includes vehicles when those vehicles are used forUniversity business.

VIII. RELATED DOCUMENTS AND POLICIES

• University of California Statement of Ethical Values and Standards of EthicalConduct

• University of California, Berkeley Principles of Community• University of California Nondiscrimination and Affirmative Action Policy Regarding

Academic and Staff Employment• University of California Policy on Sexual Harassment and Sexual Violence• University of California Whistleblower Policy (Policy on Reporting and Investigatiig

Allegations of Suspected Improper Governmental Activities)• University of California Whistleblower Protection Policy• University of California Personnel Policies for Staff Members• University of California Collective Bargaining Agreements

16

Appendix B: A.B. 2053

Assembly Bill No. 2053

CHAPTER 306

An act to amend Section 12950.1 of the Government Code, relating to employment.

[Approved by Governor September 9, 2014. Filed with Secretary of State September 9, 2014.]

LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL’S DIGEST

AB 2053, Gonzalez. Employment discrimination or harassment: education and training: abusiveconduct.

Existing law makes specified employment practices unlawful, including the harassment of an employeedirectly by the employer or indirectly by agents of the employer with the employer’s knowledge.Existing law further requires every employer to act to ensure a workplace free of sexual harassment byimplementing certain minimum requirements, including posting sexual harassment informationposters at the workplace and obtaining and making available an information sheet on sexualharassment.

Existing law also requires employers, as defined, with 50 or more employees to provide at least 2 hoursof training and education regarding sexual harassment to all supervisory employees, as specified.Existing law requires each employer to provide that training and education to each supervisoryemployee once every 2 years.

This bill would additionally require that the above-described training and education include, as acomponent of the training and education, prevention of abusive conduct, as defined.

The people of the State of California do enact as follows:

SECTION 1.

Section 12950.1 of the Government Code is amended to read:

12950.1.

(a) An employer having 50 or more employees shall provide at least two hours of classroom or othereffective interactive training and education regarding sexual harassment to all supervisory employeesin California within six months of their assumption of a supervisory position. An employer covered bythis section shall provide sexual harassment training and education to each supervisory employee inCalifornia once every two years. The training and education required by this section shall includeinformation and practical guidance regarding the federal and state statutory provisions concerning the

17

prohibition against and the prevention and correction of sexual harassment and the remedies availableto victims of sexual harassment in employment. The training and education shall also include practicalexamples aimed at instructing supervisors in the prevention of harassment, discrimination, andretaliation, and shall be presented by trainers or educators with knowledge and expertise in theprevention of harassment, discrimination, and retaliation.

(b) An employer shall also include prevention of abusive conduct as a component of the training andeducation specified in subdivision (a).

(c) The state shall incorporate the training required by subdivision (a) into the 80 hours of trainingprovided to all new supervisory employees pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 19995.4, usingexisting resources.

(d) Notwithstanding subdivisions (j) and (k) of Section 12940, a claim that the training and educationrequired by this section did not reach a particular individual or individuals shall not in and of itselfresult in the liability of any employer to any present or former employee or applicant in any actionalleging sexual harassment. Conversely, an employer’s compliance with this section does not insulatethe employer from liability for sexual harassment of any current or former employee or applicant.

(e) If an employer violates this section, the department may seek an order requiring the employer tocomply with these requirements.

(f) The training and education required by this section is intended to establish a minimum thresholdand should not discourage or relieve any employer from providing for longer, more frequent, or moreelaborate training and education regarding workplace harassment or other forms of unlawfuldiscrimination in order to meet its obligations to take all reasonable steps necessary to prevent andcorrect harassment and discrimination.

(g) (1) For purposes of this section only, “employer” means any person regularly employing 50 ormore persons or regularly receiving the services of 50 or more persons providing services pursuant to acontract, or any person acting as an agent of an employer, directly or indirectly, the state, or anypolitical or civil subdivision of the state, and cities.

(2) For purposes of this section, “abusive conduct” means conduct of an employer or employee in theworkplace, with malice, that a reasonable person would find hostile, offensive, and unrelated to anemployer’s legitimate business interests. Abusive conduct may include repeated infliction of verbalabuse, such as the use of derogatory remarks, insults, and epithets, verbal or physical conduct that areasonable person would find threatening, intimidating, or humiliating, or the gratuitous sabotage orundermining of a person’s work performance. A single act shall not constitute abusive conduct, unlessespecially severe and egregious.

18

Appendix C: Existing UC Policies

Location PolicyUC Berkeley Workplace Bullying Prevention (Proposed)

Workplace Violence PreventionUC Davis Disruptive Behavior in the WorkplaceUC Davis Medical Center Disruptive Behavior in the Workplace

Violence and Hate Incidents in the Workplace (P&P 1616)UC Irvine No policyUC Irvine Medical Center Workplace Violence Prevention & ResponseUCLA Workplace Violence PreventionUCLA Medical Center Workplace Violence Prevention

Intimidating and Disruptive Behavior (Medical Staff)Disruptive Behavior Among Employees (Health System Staff)Code of Conduct (Health System, School of Medicine)Work Rules (School of Medicine)

UC Merced Workplace Violence, Bias Incidents, Hate Crimes andDisruptive BehaviorsProhibition of Abusive Conduct and Acts of Violence (Draft)

UC Riverside Violence and Threats in the Workplace — Zero ToleranceUC San Diego Violence or Threat of Violence (Draft)

Workplace Violence Employee HandbookUC San Diego Medical Center Code of Conduct — Disruptive Physicians and Staff

Workplace Violence Employee HandbookUC San Francisco Violence in the Work PlaceUC Santa Barbara Sustaining Community and Preventing ViolenceUC Santa Cruz Violence in the Workplace Policy and HandbookAgriculture and Natural Resources Disruptive Behavior in the Workplace (UC Davis)Lawrence Berkeley National Lab Violence in the WorkplaceUC Office of the President (Local HR) Workplace Violence PreventionSystemwide APM-015: Faculty Code of Conduct

Nondiscrimination and Affirmative Action Policy RegardingAcademic and Staff EmploymentPPSM 12: Nondiscrimination in EmploymentPPSM 62: Corrective ActionPPSM 70: Complaint ResolutionPrinciples of CommunityRegents Policy 1111: Policy on Statement of Ethical Valuesand Standards of Ethical ConductSexual Violence and Sexual HarassmentStatement of Ethical ValuesStudent Conduct and Discipline

19

Appendix D: Working Group Members

Working Group Members

De Acker Director of Campus Climate, Staff Advisor to the Regents — Merced

Tanya Akel Southern California Regional Director, Teamsters

Dianna Henderson Director of HR Policy and Chief of Staff to the Vice President

Bernie Jones Deputy Chief of Staff to the President

Janna Le Blanc Assistant Director of HR and CUCSA Delegate — Riverside

David Lane Systemwide Deputy Compliance Officer

Amy Lee Diversity, Labor & Employee Relations Director, Academic Personneland Programs

Lubbe Levin Associate Vice Chancellor — UCLA

Trina Mastro Counsel, Labor and Employment

Rejeana Mathis Management Development Manager for Campus HR and CUCSA ChairElect —UCLA

Abby Norris HR Policy Specialist

Cathy O’Sullivan Chief of Staff to the Chief Operating Officer

Anita Raman Director, HR Policy and Practice — Berkeley

Anke Schennink President, UAW Local 5810

John Steele Programmer-Analyst 3 and CUCSA Delegate — UCSC

20